Saturday, February 25, 2017

GateHouse: It is time to rethink parole

It is time to rethink parole. Prisons are stuffed
beyond capacity and efforts at reform have had minimal impact and have failed
to provide any meaningful dividends.

The mantra of many parole boards is that parole is a
privilege not a right. There are many legitimate reasons to deny that privilege
-- ongoing and persistent failure to conform to prison rules, refusal or
failure to complete rehabilitation programs or a pattern of past failures on
parole.

There is little an inmate can do to immediately
correct a majority of the reasons for denying parole. Other than the passage of
time along with a persistent effort to complete programming and a genuine
commitment to planning a meaningful reintegration into society, inmates cannot
easily undo a parole board's decision to deny parole.

Parole is subjective. There are about 1.5 million
men in women in America's state and federal prisons. Most of those men and
women will be released someday. Would it be beneficial to society, and the
inmate, if release came quicker and the inmate was better prepared to succeed?

Although there are criteria and policies to guide
parole members on making release decisions, the process is different from any
other decision made in the criminal justice system.

Decisions are often made after a brief interview
with an inmate -- without the aid of counsel. The deliberation process is
brief, or in some instances nonexistent, and in many states there is no opportunity
for review. In Pennsylvania, an appellate court has held that, "(p)arole,
being a matter of administrative discretion and determination, is nonjudicial
and not subject to judicial review."

In Ohio, officials are trying to address the State
Parole Board's abysmal parole rate -- 7 percent of inmates interviewed for
parole in 2015 were released. One effort by the Department of Rehabilitation
and Corrections involves workshops to prepare inmates for interviews.

The workshops include sessions on grooming,
etiquette, selling oneself, what to say, even advice about combing hair and
brushing teeth.

The Ohio parole board touts its comprehensive
17-point release consideration criteria, but the MarshallProject.com points
out, "nowhere on that list is 'posture, dress, language and grooming or
public opinion,'" which seems to play a significant role with most parole
boards.

Ohio's lesson on the board's "public
safety" responsibility provides a glimpse into the staggering weight
public safety plays in parole decisions. As part of the lesson inmates are told
that the decision to release must be considered in the context of public
safety, and "public perception," of violent crimes. The Ohio board is
concerned with public perception not just reality.

According to Beth Schwartzapfel, inmates view a news
report, where a county prosecutor takes the parole board to task after a murder
by a parolee, "it's shameful," the prosecutor says. "They should
take the responsibility for the decision and their poor judgement." Parole
rates are often impacted by cases that go bad. Ohio goes so far as to tell
inmates that it's a parole "factor."

The parole process can be streamlined. Parole boards
should focus their time and resources on the inmates that really matter.

Parole should be split into three categories. First,
those inmates who have complied with all requirements for parole --
programming, good behavior, institutional support and a low risk assessments.
These inmates should be automatically paroled, without review by the parole
board.

Category II would include those inmates on the
bubble, maybe a high risk or past behavior history. Those inmates should be
interviewed by the board, with the aid of counsel, and the ability for review
of the decision.

Category III would be for those who are unlikely to
be paroled -- refusing programming, behavior problems and no institution support.
Those inmates are automatically refused without seeing the board. Eliminating
those who earned release and those who haven't would leave more time for the
board to focus on those inmates that need attention.

Parole interview preparation plays a role in getting
inmates out of prison. However, preparation will have little impact without
systemic change. Parole those who have earned it, keep those who haven't and
closely scrutinize those in the middle.

Matthew T. Mangino is of counsel with Luxenberg,
Garbett, Kelly & George P.C. His book "The Executioner's Toll,
2010" was released by McFarland Publishing. You can reach him atwww.mattmangino.com and follow him
on Twitter @MatthewTMangino.

About Matt

An analysis of crime and punishment from the perspective of a former prosecutor and current criminal justice practitioner.
The views expressed on this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the opinions or postions of any county, state or federal agency.